Midterm By Mohamed Abbas Aly Hegazy Mohamed Wahsh Submission

Midtermby Mohamed Abbas Aly Hegazy Mohamed Wahshsubmission Date 21 A

Evaluate and compare two company handbooks related to organizational communication. Analyze the content and purpose of each handbook, including their structure, clarity, and alignment with the company's website. Examine aspects such as mission statements, leadership messages, company history presentation, organizational structure, communication practices, ethical considerations, employee development, disciplinary procedures, and cultural indications. Assess how well each handbook conveys the company's values, culture, and internal communication strategies, and determine their usefulness for new employees. Finally, analyze the implications of the observed differences in company culture and organizational structure as reflected in the two handbooks, considering how these elements influence communication flows, workplace expectations, and organizational design.

Paper For Above instruction

Organizational handbooks serve as vital internal documents that articulate a company's values, culture, policies, and communication strategies. When comparing two such handbooks, it is essential to evaluate how effectively they reflect their respective organizations and facilitate internal cohesion and external communication. In this analysis, the focus will be on the handbooks of Valve Corporation and another company (name unspecified), examining their content, structure, alignment with corporate website narratives, and implications for organizational culture.

Valve Corporation, renowned for its innovative approach to video game development and distribution, positions itself as a flat and collaborative organization. Its company website emphasizes creativity, employee autonomy, and a culture that fosters innovation. In its handbook, Valve emphasizes a mission centered on empowering creativity and delivering high-quality gaming experiences. The inclusion of a clear mission statement underpins the organization’s cultural emphasis on innovation and freedom. The handbook lacks a traditional hierarchical leadership message but may include a message from the founders or leadership that underscores collaborative values, thereby aligning with its organizational ethos.

Regarding company history, Valve’s handbook typically integrates infographics and images to convey its evolution from a small start-up to a major industry player. This visual storytelling reinforces a culture of growth, innovation, and resilience. The organizational structure at Valve is characterized by a decentralized, team-based model, which is evident from the handbook through examples of project teams and autonomous groups. Such a structure promotes flexibility and rapid innovation, which is crucial in the gaming industry. These structural insights demonstrate a departure from traditional hierarchy, emphasizing collaboration and shared responsibility.

The handbook also touches upon communication practices within Valve, highlighting open channels, regular meetings, and reliance on digital tools to facilitate internal coordination. The presence of references to common jargon—such as 'flat organization,' 'amorphous teams,' and 'worker autonomy'—further cements the cultural identity. Ethics and corporate social responsibility (CSR) are also addressed, with an emphasis on maintaining integrity, fostering diversity, and promoting sustainable practices. However, specifics about employee development and disciplinary procedures are less explicit, perhaps reflecting a culture of mutual trust and informal oversight.

In contrast, the second company's handbook presents a more traditional corporate structure, with a clear hierarchy and formalized policies. Its mission statement aligns with the company’s public image as a responsible, customer-centric organization. The message from the CEO is explicit, emphasizing leadership’s commitment to transparency and inclusiveness. The company’s history is often presented via text supplemented with images, outlining significant milestones that reinforce stability and growth. The structure described within the handbook suggests departmental divisions, clear reporting lines, and defined roles, which aligns with a more bureaucratic organizational model.

Communication practices in the second company are typically formalized, with established channels for internal reporting and external stakeholder engagement. The presence of specific jargon—such as 'compliance,' 'protocols,' and 'standard operating procedures'—reflects a structured environment focused on accountability and consistency. Ethical policies, CSR initiatives, and transparent disciplinary procedures are highlighted, indicating an organizational culture valuing integrity, compliance, and social responsibility.

When assessing the alignment between the website and the handbook, the first company demonstrates consistency in emphasizing innovation, autonomy, and a learner-centric culture. Conversely, the second company’s handbook closely mirrors the website's portrayal of a structured, responsible organization, reinforcing its stability-focused culture. This coherence enhances clarity for employees and stakeholders, fostering trust and organizational identity.

In terms of utility for new employees, Valve’s handbook, with its emphasis on collaboration and autonomy, may serve as an inspiring guide but might lack detailed procedural guidance. Conversely, the second company’s manual provides comprehensive policies, clearly articulated procedures, and explicit expectations, which can streamline onboarding and clarify organizational norms. Therefore, the first handbook fosters a culture of trust and innovation, while the second emphasizes stability, compliance, and clarity.

Analyzing both handbooks reveals contrasting cultural models. Valve’s organizational culture appears decentralized, flexible, and innovation-driven, encouraging autonomous work within loosely structured teams. Its communication flow is informal, open, and technology-mediated, aligning with its flat organizational design. Conversely, the second organization displays a hierarchical, process-driven culture with formal communication channels, emphasizing accountability and standardized procedures. These differences influence everyday work practices, decision-making processes, and workplace expectations, shaping distinct organizational identities.

References

• Blauner, R. (1960). The Organization of Work. Glenco: Free Press.
• Gray, B. (1989). Collaborating: Finding Common Ground for Multicultural Workteams. Jossey-Bass.
• Roberts, J. (2004). The Art of Corporate Communication. Routledge.
• Schein, E.H. (2010). Organizational Culture and Leadership. Jossey-Bass.
• Scott, W.R. (1998). Organizations: Rational, Natural, and Open Systems. Prentice Hall.
• Turner, J. (2015). Internal Corporate Communication: Principles and Practice. Kogan Page.
• Daft, R.L. (2016). Organization Theory and Design. Cengage Learning.
• Rousseau, D.M. (1989). Psychological and Implicit Contracts in Organizations. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 2(2), 121-139.
• Hatch, M. J. (1997). Organization Theory: Modern, Symbolic, and Postmodern Perspectives. Oxford University Press.
• Martin, J. (2002). Organizational Culture: Mapping the Terrain. Sage Publications.